1.0

More accurately. 4* for the depth psychology archetypes, which are a useful addition to my meditation "arsenal" and provide a lot of food for thought. 1* for the book they're embedded in, which really belongs in the 1950s. Or perhaps the Rome of Constantine. The authors' idea of a "mature" man ultimately reads like a 1950s "manly man". Gender is essential and binary. Sexuality is firmly heterosexual. A real man obviously supports his wife on her return to a "satisfying career". It's Jung via St Paul with side-orders of Islamophobia (Islam the warrior religion? Check. Black-eyed hour is in paradise? Check), Orientalism (seriously, the "mystical, sensuous East is in full force here) and anti-feminism. If someone, somewhere, has developed the underlying concepts in a way that doesn't read like an "acceptable" face of the men's rights, movement, however, I'd be interested in reading it.